爆料网AT Held or 爆料网DT Pronouncements
爆料网AT considered the Appellant’s claim that the basis for the non-renewal decision was his unsuccessful application for a newly created post for which he had applied. 爆料网AT held that there was no evidence of the link between the decision not to renew his fixed-term appointment and his non-selection for the other post and considered that the timeline of events supported this. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT was correct in its finding that the non-renewal decision was a separate matter from the then-ongoing selection exercise. On the Appellant’s claim that the successive renewals of his appointment created an expectation of renewal, despite the explicit indication otherwise, 爆料网AT held that the claim had no merit. 爆料网AT highlighted that successively renewing a staff member’s appointment was not good practice and might, at some point, run the risk of establishing a pattern of conduct that could lead to some other legal consequence. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the 爆料网DT judgment.
Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed
The Applicant challenged the decision not to renew his fixed-term appointment. 爆料网DT held that the Applicant had failed to submit a timely request for management evaluation and rejected the application as not receivable ratione materiae.
Legal Principle(s)
A fixed-term appointment carries no expectancy of renewal. The date of an administrative decision is based on objective elements that both parties can accurately determine. The reiteration of an original administrative decision, if repeatedly questioned by a staff member, does not reset the clock with respect to statutory timelines; rather, time starts to run from the date on which the original decision was made.